Influenza Vaccine Uptake and Missed Opportunities Among the Medicare-Covered Population With High-Risk Conditions During the 2018 to 2019 Influenza Season : A Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Seasonal influenza causes substantial morbidity and mortality among older U.S. adults and those with comorbid health conditions. OBJECTIVE: To describe seasonal influenza vaccine uptake and identify factors associated with missed opportunities for influenza vaccination. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Medicare fee-for-service claims. PARTICIPANTS: 31.6 million U.S. adults continuously enrolled under Medicare Parts A and B during the 2018 to 2019 influenza season. MEASUREMENTS: Influenza vaccine uptake and missed opportunities by patient demographic characteristics, high-risk status (that is, ≥1 condition increasing influenza complication risk), Medicare-Medicaid dual-eligibility status, and health care provider visits (that is, vaccination opportunities). RESULTS: Overall, 50.5% of beneficiaries aged 19 years or older had Medicare claims for influenza vaccination: 31.6% among people aged 19 to 64 years and 54% among people aged 65 years or older. More White beneficiaries were vaccinated (52.9%) than Black (34.9%) or Hispanic (30.4%) beneficiaries. Uptake was higher (56.1%) for beneficiaries with high-risk conditions than for those without (27.6%). Among unvaccinated beneficiaries overall, 77.4% visited a provider during influenza season; among unvaccinated beneficiaries with and without high-risk conditions, 91% and 43%, respectively, had seen a provider at least once. The proportion of beneficiaries with missed opportunities for influenza vaccination was 44.2% and was higher for beneficiaries in the non-high-risk group (59.1%) than those in the high-risk group (42.2%). Uptake was lower and proportions of missed opportunities were higher among beneficiaries in younger age groups, of Black and Hispanic race/ethnicity, without high-risk conditions, or with Medicare-Medicaid dual eligibility. LIMITATIONS: Influenza vaccinations without claims could not be captured. Data on reasons for nonvaccination were unavailable. CONCLUSION: Influenza vaccination coverage for Medicare beneficiaries continues to be suboptimal, with missed opportunities despite availability of influenza vaccination with no copayment. Disparities persist in vaccination uptake by race/ethnicity. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: None.

National Update on Measles Cases and Outbreaks - United States, January 1-October 1, 2019.

During January 1-October 1, 2019, a total of 1,249 measles cases and 22 measles outbreaks were reported in the United States. This represents the most U.S. cases reported in a single year since 1992 (1), and the second highest number of reported outbreaks annually since measles was declared eliminated* in the United States in 2000 (2). Measles is an acute febrile rash illness with an attack rate of approximately 90% in susceptible household contacts (3). Domestic outbreaks can occur when travelers contract measles outside the United States and subsequently transmit infection to unvaccinated persons they expose in the United States. Among the 1,249 measles cases reported in 2019, 1,163 (93%) were associated with the 22 outbreaks, 1,107 (89%) were in patients who were unvaccinated or had an unknown vaccination status, and 119 (10%) measles patients were hospitalized. Closely related outbreaks in New York City (NYC) and New York State (NYS; excluding NYC), with ongoing transmission for nearly 1 year in large and close-knit Orthodox Jewish communities, accounted for 934 (75%) cases during 2019 and threatened the elimination status of measles in the United States. Robust responses in NYC and NYS were effective in controlling transmission before the 1-year mark; however, continued vigilance for additional cases within these communities is essential to determine whether elimination has been sustained. Collaboration between public health authorities and undervaccinated communities is important for preventing outbreaks and limiting transmission. The combination of maintenance of high national vaccination coverage with measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine (MMR) and rapid implementation of measles control measures remains the cornerstone for preventing widespread measles transmission (4).

Frequency and Cost of Vaccinations Administered Outside Minimum and Maximum Recommended Ages-2014 Data From 6 Sentinel Sites of Immunization Information Systems.

OBJECTIVE: To quantify vaccinations administered outside minimum and maximum recommended ages and to determine attendant costs of revaccination by analyzing immunization information system (IIS) records. STUDY DESIGN: We analyzed deidentified records of doses administered during 2014 to persons aged <18 years within 6 IIS sentinel sites (10% of the US population). We quantified doses administered outside of recommended ages according to the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices childhood immunization schedule and prescribing information in package inserts, and calculated revaccination costs. To minimize misreporting bias, we analyzed publicly funded doses for which reported lot numbers and vaccine types were consistent. RESULTS: Among 3 394 047 doses with maximum age recommendations, 9755 (0.3%) were given after the maximum age. One type of maximum age violation required revaccination: 1344 (0.7%) of 194 934 doses of the 0.25-mL prefilled syringe formulation of quadrivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (Fluzone Quadrivalent, Sanofi Pasteur, Swiftwater, PA) were administered at age ≥36 months (revaccination cost, $111 964). We identified a total of 7 529 165 childhood, adolescent, and lifespan doses with minimum age recommendations, 9542 of which (0.1%) were administered before the minimum age. The most common among these violations were quadrivalent injectable influenza vaccines (3835, or 0.7% of 526 110 doses administered before age 36 months) and Kinrix (GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals, Rixensart, Belgium; DTaP-IPV) (2509, or 1.2% of 208 218 doses administered before age 48 months). The cost of revaccination for minimum age violations (where recommended) was $179 179. CONCLUSION: Administration of vaccines outside recommended minimum and maximum ages is rare, reflecting a general adherence to recommendations. Error rates were higher for several vaccines, some requiring revaccination. Vaccine schedule complexity and confusion among similar products might contribute to errors. Minimization of errors reduces wastage, excess cost, and inconvenience for parents and patients.

Quadrivalent HPV vaccine safety review and safety monitoring plans for nine-valent HPV vaccine in the United States.

Quadrivalent human papillomavirus (4vHPV) vaccine was licensed for use in the United States in 2006 and through 2015 was the predominate HPV vaccine used. With the exception of syncope, a known preventable adverse event after any injected vaccination, both pre-licensure and post-licensure 4vHPV safety data have been reassuring with no confirmed safety signals identified. Nine-valent HPV vaccine (9vHPV) was licensed in 2014. This review includes post-licensure 4vHPV safety findings published to date that have informed the US vaccination program; these data will inform US safety monitoring and evaluation for 9vHPV.

Physician nonadherence with a hepatitis C screening program.

BACKGROUND: Testing for patients at risk for hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is recommended, but it is unclear whether providers adhere to testing guidelines. We aimed to measure adherence to an HCV screening protocol during a multifaceted continuous intervention. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Prospective cohort design to examine the associations between patient-level, physician-level, and visit-level characteristics and adherence to an HCV screening protocol. Study participants included all patients with a visit to 1 of the 3 study clinics and the physicians who cared for them. Adherence to the HCV screening protocol and patient-level, physician-level, and visit-level predictors of adherence were measured. RESULTS: A total of 8981 patients and 154 physicians were examined. Overall protocol adherence rate was 36.1%. In multivariate analysis, patient male sex (odds ratio [OR] = 1.18), new patient (OR = 1.23), morning visit (OR = 1.32), and patients' preferred language being non-English (OR = 0.87) were significantly associated with screening adherence. There was a wide variation in overall adherence among physicians (range, 0%-92.4%). Screening adherence continuously declined from 59.1% in week 1 of the study to 13.7% in week 15 (final week). When implementing complex clinical practice guidelines, planners should address physician attitudinal barriers as well as gaps in knowledge to maximize adherence.

Effect of influenza vaccination of healthcare personnel on morbidity and mortality among patients: systematic review and grading of evidence.

BACKGROUND: Influenza vaccination of healthcare personnel (HCP) is recommended in >40 countries. However, there is controversy surrounding the evidence that HCP vaccination reduces morbidity and mortality among patients. Key factors for developing evidence-based recommendations include quality of evidence, balance of benefits and harms, and values and preferences. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of randomized trials, cohort studies, and case-control studies published through June 2012 to evaluate the effect of HCP influenza vaccination on mortality, hospitalization, and influenza cases in patients of healthcare facilities. We pooled trial results using meta-analysis and assessed evidence quality using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. RESULTS: We identified 4 cluster randomized trials and 4 observational studies conducted in long-term care or hospital settings. Pooled risk ratios across trials for all-cause mortality and influenza-like illness were 0.71 (95% confidence interval [CI], .59-.85) and 0.58 (95% CI, .46-.73), respectively; pooled estimates for all-cause hospitalization and laboratory-confirmed influenza were not statistically significant. The cohort and case-control studies indicated significant protective associations for influenza-like illness and laboratory-confirmed influenza. No studies reported harms to patients. Using GRADE, the quality of the evidence for the effect of HCP vaccination on mortality and influenza cases in patients was moderate and low, respectively. The evidence quality for the effect of HCP vaccination on patient hospitalization was low. The overall evidence quality was moderate. CONCLUSIONS: The quality of evidence is higher for mortality than for other outcomes. HCP influenza vaccination can enhance patient safety.

Prospective cost-benefit analysis of a two-dimensional barcode for vaccine production, clinical documentation, and public health reporting and tracking.

In the United States recording accurate vaccine lot numbers in immunization records is required by the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act and is necessary for public health surveillance and implementation of vaccine product recalls. However, this information is often missing or inaccurate in records. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) requires a linear barcode of the National Drug Code (NDC) on vaccine product labels as a medication verification measure, but lot number and expiration date must still be recorded by hand. Beginning in 2011, FDA permitted manufacturers to replace linear barcodes with two-dimensional (2D) barcodes on unit-of-use product labels. A 2D barcode can contain the NDC, expiration date, and lot number in a symbol small enough to fit on a unit-of-use label. All three data elements could be scanned into a patient record. To assess 2D barcodes' potential impacts, a mixed-methods approach of time-motion data analysis, interview and survey data collection, and cost-benefit analysis was employed. Analysis of a time-motion study conducted at 33 practices suggests scanning 2D-barcoded vaccines could reduce immunization documentation time by 36-39 s per dose. Data from an internet survey of primary care providers and local health officials indicate that 60% of pediatric practices, 54% of family medicine practices, and 39% of health departments would use the 2D barcode, with more indicating they would do so if they used electronic health records. Inclusive of manufacturer and immunization provider costs and benefits, we forecast lower-bound net benefits to be $310-334 million between 2011 and 2023 with a benefit-to-cost ratio of 3.1:1-3.2:1. Although we were unable to monetize benefits for expected improved immunization coverage, surveillance, or reduced medication errors, based on our findings, we expect that using 2D barcodes will lower vaccine documentation costs, facilitate data capture, and enhance immunization data quality.

Trends in compliance with two-dose influenza vaccine recommendations among children aged 6 months through 8 years.

Children aged <9 years may require two doses of influenza vaccine to achieve an adequate immune response to protect against the disease. We analyzed data for >2 million children in each influenza season from 2007 to 2012 from eight Immunization Information System Sentinel Sites to assess trends in two-dose compliance. Compliance was calculated by influenza season, age group, and influenza vaccination history. Two-dose compliance increased from 49% to 60% among 6-23 month olds from 2007 to 2012; no increase was observed for 2-4 or 5-8 year olds. In each season, compliance was 3-12 times higher among 6-23 month olds compared to older children and was two times higher among influenza vaccine naïve children compared to previously vaccinated children. Improved messaging for providers and parents about the importance of the two-dose recommendation, about which children are eligible for two doses, and provider access to complete influenza vaccination histories for all children are needed.

Effectiveness of a risk screener in identifying hepatitis C virus in a primary care setting.

OBJECTIVES: We evaluated an intervention designed to identify patients at risk for hepatitis C virus (HCV) through a risk screener used by primary care providers. METHODS: A clinical reminder sticker prompted physicians at 3 urban clinics to screen patients for 12 risk factors and order HCV testing if any risks were present. Risk factor data were collected from the sticker; demographic and testing data were extracted from electronic medical records. We used the t test, χ(2) test, and rank-sum test to compare patients who had and had not been screened and developed an analytic model to identify the incremental value of each element of the screener. RESULTS: Among screened patients, 27.8% (n = 902) were identified as having at least 1 risk factor. Of screened patients with risk factors, 55.4% (n = 500) were tested for HCV. Our analysis showed that 7 elements (injection drug use, intranasal drug use, elevated alanine aminotransferase, transfusions before 1992, ≥ 20 lifetime sex partners, maternal HCV, existing liver disease) accounted for all HCV infections identified. CONCLUSIONS: A brief risk screener with a paper-based clinical reminder was effective in increasing HCV testing in a primary care setting.

The association between use of non-injection drug implements and hepatitis C virus antibody status in homeless and marginally housed persons in San Francisco.

BACKGROUND: Up to 17,000 persons in the USA became infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV) in 2007, and many cases have unknown transmission routes. To date research on transmission of HCV via shared implements used to snort or smoke non-injection drugs has been inconclusive. METHODS: We tested stored sera for HCV antibodies (anti-HCV) in a large population-based study of homeless and marginally housed persons in San Francisco. We examined the association between sharing implements used for snorting and smoking drugs and anti-HCV while controlling for sociodemographic variables in those who denied ever injecting drugs (n = 430). We also examined the association of anti-HCV status with history of incarceration, tattoo and piercing history, sexual history and alcohol consumption. RESULTS: Seventeen percent of our sample was anti-HCV positive. We found no statistically significant associations with sharing implements used to smoke or snort drugs with anti-HCV status in our various multivariate models. There was a statistically significant negative association between ever snorting cocaine and anti-HCV status (adjusted odds ratio: 0.39; 95% confidence interval: 0.21-0.73). There were no other statistically significant associations with any other measured covariates in multivariate analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that sharing implements to snort or smoke drugs is not a significant risk factor for anti-HCV-positive status.

Primary care-based interventions are associated with increases in hepatitis C virus testing for patients at risk.

BACKGROUND: An estimated 3.2 million persons are chronically infected with the hepatitis C virus (HCV) in the U.S. Effective treatment is available, but approximately 50% of patients are not aware that they are infected. Optimal testing strategies have not been described. METHODS: The Hepatitis C Assessment and Testing Project (HepCAT) was a serial cross-sectional evaluation of two community-based interventions designed to increase HCV testing in urban primary care clinics in comparison with a baseline period. The first intervention (risk-based screener) prompted physicians to order HCV tests based on the presence of HCV-related risks. The second intervention (birth cohort) prompted physicians to order HCV tests on all patients born within a high-prevalence birth cohort (1945-1964). The study was conducted at three primary care clinics in the Bronx, New York. RESULTS: Both interventions were associated with an increased proportion of patients tested for HCV from 6.0% at baseline to 13.1% during the risk-based screener period (P<0.001) and 9.9% during the birth cohort period (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Two simple clinical reminder interventions were associated with significantly increased HCV testing rates. Our findings suggest that HCV screening programs, using either a risk-based or birth cohort strategy, should be adopted in primary care settings so that HCV-infected patients may benefit from antiviral treatment.

The cost-effectiveness of birth-cohort screening for hepatitis C antibody in U.S. primary care settings.

BACKGROUND: In the United States, hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is most prevalent among adults born from 1945 through 1965, and approximately 50% to 75% of infected adults are unaware of their infection. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of birth-cohort screening. DESIGN: Cost-effectiveness simulation. DATA SOURCES: National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, U.S. Census, Medicare reimbursement schedule, and published sources. TARGET POPULATION: Adults born from 1945 through 1965 with 1 or more visits to a primary care provider annually. TIME HORIZON: Lifetime. PERSPECTIVE: Societal, health care. INTERVENTION: One-time antibody test of 1945-1965 birth cohort. OUTCOME MEASURES: Numbers of cases that were identified and treated and that achieved a sustained viral response; liver disease and death from HCV; medical and productivity costs; quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs); incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS: Compared with the status quo, birth-cohort screening identified 808,580 additional cases of chronic HCV infection at a screening cost of $2874 per case identified. Assuming that birth-cohort screening was followed by pegylated interferon and ribavirin (PEG-IFN+R) for treated patients, screening increased QALYs by 348,800 and costs by $5.5 billion, for an ICER of $15,700 per QALY gained. Assuming that birth-cohort screening was followed by direct-acting antiviral plus PEG-IFN+R treatment for treated patients, screening increased QALYs by 532,200 and costs by $19.0 billion, for an ICER of $35,700 per QALY saved. RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS: The ICER of birth-cohort screening was most sensitive to sustained viral response of antiviral therapy, the cost of therapy, the discount rate, and the QALY losses assigned to disease states. LIMITATION: Empirical data on screening and direct-acting antiviral treatment in real-world clinical settings are scarce. CONCLUSION: Birth-cohort screening for HCV in primary care settings was cost-effective. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Division of Viral Hepatitis, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Performance of premarket rapid hepatitis C virus antibody assays in 4 national human immunodeficiency virus behavioral surveillance system sites.

SUMMARY: Performance characteristics of rapid assays for hepatitis C virus antibody were evaluated in 4 National HIV Behavioral Surveillance System injection drug use sites. The highest assay-specific sensitivities achieved for the Chembio, MedMira and OraSure tests were 94.0%, 78.9%, and 97.4%, respectively; the highest specificities were 97.7%, 83.3%, and 100%, respectively. BACKGROUND: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates that 4.1 million Americans have been infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV) and 75%-80% of them are living with chronic HCV infection, many unaware of their infection. Persons who inject drugs (PWID) account for 57.5% of all persons with HCV antibody (anti-HCV) in the United States. Currently no point-of-care tests for HCV infection are approved for use in the United States. METHODS: Surveys and testing for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and anti-HCV were conducted among persons who reported injection drug use in the past 12 months as part of the National HIV Behavioral Surveillance System in 2009. The sensitivity and specificity of point-of-care tests (finger-stick and 2 oral fluid rapid assays) from 3 manufacturers (Chembio, MedMira, and OraSure) were evaluated in field settings in 4 US cities. RESULTS: Sensitivity (78.9%-97.4%) and specificity (80.0%-100.0%) were variable across assays and sites. The highest assay-specific sensitivities achieved for the Chembio, MedMira, and OraSure tests were 94.0%, 78.9% and 97.4%, respectively; the highest specificities were 97.7%, 83.3%, and 100%, respectively. In multivariate analysis, false-negative anti-HCV results were associated with HIV positivity for the Chembio oral assay (adjusted odds ratio, 8.4-9.1; P < .01) in 1 site (New York City). CONCLUSIONS: Sensitive rapid anti-HCV assays are appropriate and feasible for high-prevalence, high-risk populations such as PWID, who can be reached through social service settings such as syringe exchange programs and methadone maintenance treatment programs.

Evaluation of three rapid screening assays for detection of antibodies to hepatitis C virus.

BACKGROUND: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates that 3.2 million Americans are living with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection and 50%-70% are unaware of their status. Although therapies are available that can suppress or eliminate infection, identifying persons infected with HCV is challenging. Rapid tests could help identify many of these persons more expeditiously. METHODS: Three manufacturers, Chembio, OraSure, and MedMira, submitted HCV antibody (anti-HCV) rapid screening assays to the CDC for evaluation and comparison with established anti-HCV screening assays. The panel consisted of 1100 specimens drawn during 1997-1999 from persons reporting injection drug use. Sensitivity and specificity were assessed using 2 reference approaches, one based on the reactivity of samples in an anti-HCV screening assay and the other based on CDC HCV testing algorithm. RESULTS: The sensitivities of the Chembio, MedMira, and OraSure assays across the 2 approaches were 96.2%-98.0%, 86.8%-88.3%, and 97.8%-99.3%, respectively. The 3 assays had specificity of 99.5% or higher with no differences between assays. False rapid assay results were associated with human immunodeficiency virus positivity for both approaches for Chembio and MedMira. CONCLUSIONS: Rapid anti-HCV tests can provide sensitive and specific anti-HCV results for high-risk patients.

Models of community-based hepatitis B surface antigen screening programs in the U.S. and their estimated outcomes and costs.

OBJECTIVES: Information on the process and method of service delivery is sparse for hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) testing, and no systematic study has evaluated the relative effectiveness or cost-effectiveness of different HBsAg screening models. To address this need, we compared five specific community-based screening programs. METHODS: We funded five HBsAg screening programs to collect information on their design, costs, and outcomes of participants during a six-month observation period. We categorized programs into four types of models. For each model, we calculated the number screened, the number screened as per Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommendations, and the cost per screening. RESULTS: The models varied by cost per person screened and total number of people screened, but they did not differ meaningfully in the proportion of people screened following CDC recommendations, the proportion of those screened who tested positive, or the proportion of those who newly tested positive. CONCLUSIONS: Integrating screening into outpatient service settings is the most cost-effective method but may not reach all people needing to be screened. Future research should examine cost-effective methods that expand the reach of screening into communities in outpatient settings.

HCV screening practices and prevalence in an MCO, 2000-2007.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends routine screening for the hepatitis C virus antibody (anti- HCV) among persons most likely to be infected. Little is known about anti-HCV screening and prevalence in routine practice settings. We studied anti-HCV screening rates, anti-HCV positivity, and demographic and risk factors associated with increased likelihood of anti-HCV screening or positivity in a managed care organization (MCO). METHODS: This was a retrospective observational study of 17-to-74-year-old MCO enrollees from 2000 to 2007 (N = 557,056; 1,949,499 enrollee years). The primary outcome measures were likelihood of anti-HCV screening and HCV positivity (both in the total population and among those screened). Independent variables were: birth cohort, gender, HCV risk factors, and socioeconomic status (SES) and race of residents' neighborhoods. Likelihood of each outcome as a function of the independent variables was estimated using logistic regression. RESULTS: Over the 8-year period, 4.31% of the total population received anti-HCV screening; 0.22% had a positive HCV result. Among those screened, HCV positivity was 5.15%. HCV screening and positivity rates increased over time. Both likelihood of HCV screening and HCV positivity were highest (P <0.05) among persons born during 1945-1964, males, those with HCV risk factors, and residents of neighborhoods of lower SES or with higher percentages of African Americans. CONCLUSIONS: Although HCV screening and detection improved in this MCO over an 8-year period, anti-HCV screening was lower than expected. Many persons at risk for HCV remained unscreened. Strategies for improving anti-HCV screening in routine practice are recommended for patients at increased risk.

Hepatitis B vaccination coverage among high-risk adults 18-49 years, U.S., 2009.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 43,000 new hepatitis B virus (HBV) infections occurred in 2007. Although hepB vaccination has been recommended for adults at high-risk for incident HBV infection for many years, coverage remains low. METHODS: We used the 2009 National Health Interview Survey to assess self-reported HepB vaccine uptake (≥ 1 dose), series completion (≥ 3 dose), and independent predictors of vaccination among high-risk adults aged 18-49 years. High-risk adults were defined as those reporting male sex with men; injection drug use; hemophilia with receipt of clotting factors; sexually transmitted disease in prior five years; sex for money or drugs; HIV positive; sex with persons having any above risk factors; or who "felt they were at high risk for HIV". Persons with none of the aforementioned risk factors were considered non-high risk. Bivariate analysis was conducted to assess vaccination coverage. Independent predictors of vaccine uptake and series completion were determined using a logistic regression. RESULTS: Overall, 7.0% adults aged 18-49 years had high-risk behaviors. Unadjusted coverage with ≥ 1 dose was 50.5% among high-risk compared to 40.5% among non-high-risk adults (p-values <0.001) while series completion (≥ 3 doses) was 41.8% and 34.2%, respectively (p-values <0.001). On multivariable analysis, ≥ 1 dose coverage, but not series completion, was higher (Risk Ratio 1.1, 95% CI=1.0-1.2, p-value=0.021) among high-risk compared to non-high risk adults. Other characteristics independently associated with a higher likelihood of HepB vaccination among persons 18-49 years included younger age groups, females, higher education, ≥ 2 physician contacts in the past year, ever tested for HIV, health care personnel, received influenza vaccination in the previous year, and ever received hepatitis A vaccination. Vaccine uptake with ≥ 1 dose increased by 5.1% (p=0.047) among high-risk adults between 2004 and 2009. CONCLUSIONS: A small increase in ≥ 1 dose HepB vaccination coverage among high-risk adults compared with non-high risk adults was documented for the first time in 2009. Higher coverage among persons 18-30 years may reflect aging of persons vaccinated when they were children and adolescents. To improve protection against hepatitis B among high-risk adults, healthcare providers should offer hepatitis B vaccination to persons at high risk and those who seek vaccination to protect themselves and facilitate timely completion of the three (3) dose HepB series.